CloudStrife213's forum posts

Avatar image for CloudStrife213
CloudStrife213

430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1  Edited By CloudStrife213
Member since 2006 • 430 Posts

@tormentos said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

If you can assume that Sony didn't intend to implement DRM. I can assume that Sony intended to implement DRM. Unless you are a Sony executive/employee. What evidence have you that they didn't intend to implement DRM. I have my links. Where's yours?

It's funny how Sony is the good guy all the time and that you assume that Sony would only implement DRM because they were forced to when you have no idea of their intentions. Again, if you can assume that Sony didn't intend to implement DRM. I can assume that Sony intended to implement DRM. No evidence points towards Sony not considering implementing DRM, but if you read my previous posts you would see that they were considering to have DRM.

I never said that first party games would be DRM. All I said is that they would allow third party developers to choose whether their game has DRM or not. Quit putting words into my mouth. If you read my entire post you wouldn't be posting nonsense.

No they were very clear on what they say and even Treton basically say that is the developers problem to face outrage by consumers,he fiercely claim that they will not do it,and before that interview Yoshida stated the same.

Now if developers blocked games on xbox one and wanted to do the same on PS4 sony would not say anything but of they wanted to block games on xbox one and not on PS4 they would say nothing as well is call neutral,they give the choice to developers it up to them to screw up with consumers,and it would have been that way if developers actually dare to block used games people who do this would stop buying games that implemented the feature period.

Fact is MS confirmed this was true,sony never did and deny it so yeah you can assume what you want about a patent facts are there and MS wanted to go forward even that sony since February 2013 claimed it would not block them,it wasn't until the after E3 outrage that MS saw how horrible xbox one pre-orders were doing that they change it everything.

@CloudStrife213 said:

First-party games are irrelevant. What's relevant to the discussion is that Sony would allow publishers to implement DRM on their console. The majority of publishers are third-party.

Sony didn't have any policies restricting DRM for third-party publishers. Jack Tretton said it himself, that is of course until the backlash from DRM.How many times do I have to repeat that to you? Sony didn't force DRM, but they didn't disallow it either.

A quote that applies to this; "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

You have no point what so ever the implementation of DRM was going to happen on the developers side not sony's side,which they can still do now,in fact every developer on xbox one or PS4 can chose to require online for the game to work which would allow for easy finding if the game was played on another console and actually blocking you from playing the game,that still exist to this day developers don't do it because they know better.

Now what MS was implementing was DRM on a much lower level than developers it was at system level,and they had to make an update just to remove the DRM scheme from the unit,sony didn't have that period because they never planed DRM at low level like MS did this is a fact period.

@sts106mat said:

hahaha brofists hasn't changed

I cant deny that PS4 is more powerful, but it is a fact that they lied about killzone, Thief is better on XB1 and tomb raider isn't exactly a graphical masterpiece.

Ryse craps on killzones graphics....that IS a fact.

by cows own rules Killzone is a blurry mess

Again with the conjecture from Tormentos. Why am I not surprised? If there is anybody who would defend everything about Sony no matter how bad it is for them it would be you. Now send me all the links where Tretton claimed that he would not support DRM before the date of the interview where he said Sony will allow DRM. Quit making things up.

tormentos : Jack Tretton say that is the developers problem to face outrage by consumers,he fiercely claim that they will not do it,and before that interview Yoshida stated the same.(Made up: When did he say that?! Link please, also the date must be before the interview where Tretton said they would allow DRM on the PS4, so as not to show Sony's views after the backlash over the Xbox One used games fiasco.)

Please send me evidence where they will allow DRM on both consoles today.

I repeat what I have said several times, but you choose to ignore it. Sony would allow DRM on their console as stated in the interview.

Answer my question.

How is allowing DRM on your console a good thing?

The majority of developers/publishers are third-party. How is that good?

Just because Sony's first-party games would not have DRM, it still does not change the fact that they would allow 3rd party developers to put DRM on the game or not.

Also, I can't stand reading your sentences, the punctuation, the grammar, the spelling are just atrocious. Take a look at your own post and see if you can understand all that dribble. I can barely understand it. It's english for pre-schoolers. You have my ranking as the worst cow on this forum. No offense, just saying the truth. Sometimes you can't reason with people with an intellectual level such as yours.

Example? tormentos: in fact every developer on xbox one or PS4 can chose to require online for the game to work which would allow for easy finding if the game was played another console and actually blocking you from playing the game,that still exist to this day developers don't do it because they know better.

Tormentos, you seem to forget that credibility does not stand alone on the person. One must provide evidence. As I have, but which you cows are still too blind to look at.

In conclusion, no use debating with an extremely blind fanboy such as yourself that will defend Sony in everything. I don't deserve to look at such horribly written paragraphs, otherwise my IQ might drop.

Avatar image for CloudStrife213
CloudStrife213

430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2  Edited By CloudStrife213
Member since 2006 • 430 Posts

IGN comment that stands out

"The only reason this is a big deal is because Sony fanboys wouldn't shut up about how great the PS4 is because it can do 1080p no problem. Now that news breaks that it can't, and suddenly they start saying what Xbox fans have been saying all along: native resolution doesn't make or break a game. It's a big deal because of the hypocrisy, not because native resolution really matters that much."

Avatar image for CloudStrife213
CloudStrife213

430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 CloudStrife213
Member since 2006 • 430 Posts

@Boddicker said:

The bottom line is 1080p 60fps should have been easily achievable this console gen.

Both Sony and M$ failed.

/thread

Absolutely correct.

Sadly, cows can't accept that fact.

Avatar image for CloudStrife213
CloudStrife213

430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4  Edited By CloudStrife213
Member since 2006 • 430 Posts

@LJS9502_basic said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

First-party games are irrelevant. What's relevant to the discussion is that Sony would allow publishers to implement DRM on their console. The majority of publishers are third-party.

Sony didn't have any policies restricting DRM for third-party publishers. Jack Tretton said it himself, that is of course until the backlash from DRM.How many times do I have to repeat that to you? Sony didn't force DRM, but they didn't disallow it either.

A quote that applies to this; "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

Oh for ****'s sake. Way to ignore my point and continue on with third parties. You sir have repeatedly failed to provide the proof I asked of you.

Where was it in any of my posts that I said that Sony will be implementing DRM on their first-party games? All I said was that they didn't have any policy regarding third-party games having or not having DRM. Sony didn't have any policies restricting DRM for third-party publishers. I NEVER said that Sony would apply DRM to first-party games, quit putting words in my mouth. I only said that Sony would allow third-party publishers to implement DRM.

Sony did not want to implement DRM on their own games, but they would allow third-party publishers to do what they see fit, DRM or non-DRM.

Read my posts again. And read the interview again.

Avatar image for CloudStrife213
CloudStrife213

430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 CloudStrife213
Member since 2006 • 430 Posts

@gggoodboy said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

@LJS9502_basic said:

@CloudStrife213:

LOL dude. Did you even read your links? What does the world third party mean to you?

It means that Sony would ALLOW DRM on their console, instead of disallowing it. Both companies have disallowed DRM on both consoles now. You act as if every publisher is first party.

Wrong again!

The difference was Sony was NEVER planning on implementing DRM or always online....and you can gain as much from just even reading YOUR OWN links

Where as Microsoft DID PLAN to implement them, and did go full steam ahead with all of their henious anti-consumer xbone policies....Microsoft ONLY stopped at the last second due to losing pre orders

So its like Microsoft had their knife of DRM/always online touching the skin of gamers throats and right before slicing and butchering consumers rights, cops came and Microsoft was forced to put the knife away. Microsoft saw they were losing pre orders and were forced to stop

No OTHER gaming company has been as anti-consumer as Microsoft is....No other company has ever tried to get away with the things Microsoft has done....Microsoft is a cancer to the gaming industry and needs to be erradicated

If Microsoft had their way drm/always online would be the "norm" and TV features would be > gaming

So thats why people are even more glad that the PS4 is crushing the xbone in sales. Sending all the right messages.

PS4 all the way. Its much more powerful yet much cheaper. Gaming is the focus. PSN+ > XBL. No madatory kinect spy cam. Playstation exclusive developers are the best etc. PS4 is superior to the xbone in every respect. Makes no sense to get an xbone when the PS4 exists and does everything better for less

Funny how you can assume that Sony never planned on implementing DRM? What are you, a Sony employee? Just because they don't announce it to the whole world doesn't mean that they weren't planning it. Ever heard of trade secrets?

Again, as I have told others. If you can assume that Sony never intended on implementing DRM. Show me the proof. If you don't have any proof then I can safely assume too that Sony was indeed planning to implement DRM. I have partial proof showing that Sony was considering DRM with the interview and patents.

Give me the proof that Sony was never considering DRM and we'll settle this once and for all. Otherwise, all you say is conjecture.

Avatar image for CloudStrife213
CloudStrife213

430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6  Edited By CloudStrife213
Member since 2006 • 430 Posts

@LJS9502_basic said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

@LJS9502_basic said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

So you basically admitted it yourself? You basically agree with my argument that Sony was considering DRM. Also, you cannot assume that Sony didn't intend to implement DRM. What evidence have you that they didn't intend to implement DRM. I have my links. Where's yours?

No I don't agree with your argument. And you can't see the difference. So it's pointless to prolong this painful discussion.

You want to prove Sony intended DRM then show me where they said their first party games would be DRM. Because you haven't.

If you can assume that Sony didn't intend to implement DRM. I can assume that Sony intended to implement DRM. Unless you are a Sony executive/employee. What evidence have you that they didn't intend to implement DRM. I have my links. Where's yours?

It's funny how Sony is the good guy all the time and that you assume that Sony would only implement DRM because they were forced to when you have no idea of their intentions. Again, if you can assume that Sony didn't intend to implement DRM. I can assume that Sony intended to implement DRM. No evidence points towards Sony not considering implementing DRM, but if you read my previous posts you would see that they were considering to have DRM.

I never said that first party games would be DRM. All I said is that they would allow third party developers to choose whether their game has DRM or not. Quit putting words into my mouth. If you read my entire post you wouldn't be posting nonsense.

Sure you can assume whatever you like if you like looking the fool. IF Sony intended DRM where is the announcements that their games....not third party....but first party would be DRM? Short that proof you are just posting wishful thinking.

Sony a good guy? My complaint with MS had nothing to do with Sony. I was just glad they said no DRM and got the response they did...because THAT AND ONLY THAT....changed MS' policy. Had that not happened...the X1 would be as announced at E3. And that is no good for gaming nor consumers. I vote with my money for positive experiences....not negative. MS lost my money thus far because of how THEY have handled this gen. Not because of what Sony....Nintendo....nor anyone else could possibly do. I'm not blind to a brand. If I find it too expensive, having manufacturing issues, lacking in some respect....in regard to gaming.....games that are exclusive and must haves.....and definitely creating anti consumer policy....they don't get my loyalty. Period.

As for your last paragraph I've explained to you several times now that one has to make their product to the industry standard. IF DRM became industry standard then a manufacturer would have to provide for that. We have no PS4's in production that have DRM policies.

I'm not posting nonsense. A manufacturer saying any DRM would be up to the publish does inherently mean it's their policy. But you can't see that. Fanboy much?

First-party games are irrelevant. What's relevant to the discussion is that Sony would allow publishers to implement DRM on their console. The majority of publishers are third-party.

Sony didn't have any policies restricting DRM for third-party publishers. Jack Tretton said it himself, that is of course until the backlash from DRM.How many times do I have to repeat that to you? Sony didn't force DRM, but they didn't disallow it either.

A quote that applies to this; "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

Avatar image for CloudStrife213
CloudStrife213

430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7  Edited By CloudStrife213
Member since 2006 • 430 Posts

@sts106mat said:

@GrenadeLauncher said:

@sts106mat said:

@GrenadeLauncher said:

@sts106mat said:

@gggoodboy said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

@gggoodboy said:

@2mrw said:

@Suppaman100:

I don't really care so much about the X1 situation here.

The KZ:SF fiasco is enough to prove my point here. And nop, most games aren't 1080/60, aside from indies of course.

No ONE CARES about Killzone's MP resolution.

The ONLY ones making a big deal out of it are xbots like you whove been sitting at your computer chairs with shit in your hand just hoping and waiting for any little piece of negative Sony news you can find to blow up and run with...you know since the xbone legit has been complete and utter shit...

Seriously calling it a fiasco is straight up trolling.

If Killzone's 920x1080p MP resolution is a fiasco....then what do we call Ryse being 900p while being linear and scripted to the max....that must be a diaster

Killzone's 926x1080p resolution in MP (IF Digital Foundry is to be believed which they shouldnt considering their shady history) but just saying so for arguements sake.....If true that resolution still >>>>>>>>>>>>most xbone games.....so again whats the problem? There is none !

Such desperate and pathetic reaching from xbots

You xbots truly are the most delusional

It's funny that the same people who say they don't care about the resolution and framerate for KZ: SF, are the same people bashing the Xbox One for its resolution/frame rate. You can't have it both ways. Hypocrisy at its finest.

Are you stupid?

Killzone MP is claimed to have a 926x1080p resolution

Thats still a higher resolution then most id not all xbone games have

So in fact, its the other way around

You xboners who are trying to make this a big deal in regards to Killzone while ignoring that most xbone games have a LOWER RESOLUTION...are insane and are beyond hypocrticial....

Until a PS4 exclusive has 720p or 900p like Ryse THAN you can talk

PS4 gamers can still rightfully make fun of the xbone's pathetic performance....Killzone MP STILL has a higher resolution then a vast majority of xbone games WHILE also looking MUCH better then anything on an xbone

Its butt hurt xbot shills like you WHO are trying to make this thing about killzone an issue its NOT

At the end of the day, what you wrote has nothing to do with anything I said.....do you even realise how delusional you are coming as across....youre delusional and I mean it....hope everyone starts flagging your awful posts you xbot shill

actually ALL XB1 exclusive Multiplayer games run at a higher res than PS4's hahaaha

Fucking better do in 2014 with textures like these.

funny, i dont remember seeing an "E" button on my Xbone controller .

Just imagine how bad it'll look on the Xbone. To compare from the Alpha:

didn't play the alpha, but i was more than happy with the beta. It may not be the greatest looking game, but it certainly plays great. cry more butthurt boy

Another pet peeve of mine are fanboys who hate on games just because it isn't on their console of choice. Ahhh.. "Choice-Supportive Bias"

Avatar image for CloudStrife213
CloudStrife213

430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8  Edited By CloudStrife213
Member since 2006 • 430 Posts

@LJS9502_basic said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

@LJS9502_basic said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

@tormentos said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

How is it speculation when it came out of the own mouth of Jack Tretton? Yes, MS was outspoken on its policies, especially because they announced it at E3, but Sony kept quiet and under the radar, as evidenced by interviews and patents. Unless you believe that Jack Tretton is lying in those interviews, then I can't see any other point of view. They let MS take the fall for it first before totally outlawing DRM.

"There's gonna be free-to-play, there's gonna be every potential business model on there, and again, that's up to their relationship with the consumer, what do they think is going to put them in the best fit. We're not going to dictate that, we're gonna give them a platform to publish on. The DRM decision is going to have to be answered by the third parties, it's not something we're going to control, or dictate, or mandate, or implement."

Owned by the same crap you posted sony say it was up to developers,and look at the tone he use before like well if the developer is up to them to face problem with costumers.

That first bold part clear as water,and the second part confirms it no DRM from sony..ahahahaa

Owned by your own link...hahaha

It's so funny that you can't understand what he said. Reading Comprehension anybody?

As I have been saying, they didn't dictate whether games would use DRM or not. They left it up to publishers. They did not have any policy regarding DRM. They would allow publishers to implement DRM. And we all know what most publishers want. How is allowing DRM any different or good?

You on the other hand have admitted that Sony would allow DRM on their console, allowing third-party publishers to implement DRM.

You are the one who got owned.

You make me want to smash my head on my desk. What YOU aren't understanding is Sony has to compete in the marketplace. Period. So if the industry goes DRM...they have to have a means to allow that. That DOES NOT mean Sony intended to implement DRM.

Damn dude....

So you basically admitted it yourself? You basically agree with my argument that Sony was considering DRM. Also, you cannot assume that Sony didn't intend to implement DRM. What evidence have you that they didn't intend to implement DRM. I have my links. Where's yours?

No I don't agree with your argument. And you can't see the difference. So it's pointless to prolong this painful discussion.

You want to prove Sony intended DRM then show me where they said their first party games would be DRM. Because you haven't.

If you can assume that Sony didn't intend to implement DRM. I can assume that Sony intended to implement DRM. Unless you are a Sony executive/employee. What evidence have you that they didn't intend to implement DRM. I have my links. Where's yours?

It's funny how Sony is the good guy all the time and that you assume that Sony would only implement DRM because they were forced to when you have no idea of their intentions. Again, if you can assume that Sony didn't intend to implement DRM. I can assume that Sony intended to implement DRM. No evidence points towards Sony not considering implementing DRM, but if you read my previous posts you would see that they were considering to have DRM.

I never said that first party games would be DRM. All I said is that they would allow third party developers to choose whether their game has DRM or not. Quit putting words into my mouth. If you read my entire post you wouldn't be posting nonsense.

Avatar image for CloudStrife213
CloudStrife213

430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9  Edited By CloudStrife213
Member since 2006 • 430 Posts

@LJS9502_basic said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

@tormentos said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

How is it speculation when it came out of the own mouth of Jack Tretton? Yes, MS was outspoken on its policies, especially because they announced it at E3, but Sony kept quiet and under the radar, as evidenced by interviews and patents. Unless you believe that Jack Tretton is lying in those interviews, then I can't see any other point of view. They let MS take the fall for it first before totally outlawing DRM.

"There's gonna be free-to-play, there's gonna be every potential business model on there, and again, that's up to their relationship with the consumer, what do they think is going to put them in the best fit. We're not going to dictate that, we're gonna give them a platform to publish on. The DRM decision is going to have to be answered by the third parties, it's not something we're going to control, or dictate, or mandate, or implement."

Owned by the same crap you posted sony say it was up to developers,and look at the tone he use before like well if the developer is up to them to face problem with costumers.

That first bold part clear as water,and the second part confirms it no DRM from sony..ahahahaa

Owned by your own link...hahaha

It's so funny that you can't understand what he said. Reading Comprehension anybody?

As I have been saying, they didn't dictate whether games would use DRM or not. They left it up to publishers. They did not have any policy regarding DRM. They would allow publishers to implement DRM. And we all know what most publishers want. How is allowing DRM any different or good?

You on the other hand have admitted that Sony would allow DRM on their console, allowing third-party publishers to implement DRM.

You are the one who got owned.

You make me want to smash my head on my desk. What YOU aren't understanding is Sony has to compete in the marketplace. Period. So if the industry goes DRM...they have to have a means to allow that. That DOES NOT mean Sony intended to implement DRM.

Damn dude....

So you basically admitted it yourself? You basically agree with my argument that Sony was considering DRM because of the industry. Like you said, they need to compete if needed.

Also, if you can assume that Sony didn't intend to implement DRM. I can assume that Sony intended to implement DRM. Unless you are a Sony executive/employee. What evidence have you that they didn't intend to implement DRM. I have my links. Where's yours?

Avatar image for CloudStrife213
CloudStrife213

430

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10  Edited By CloudStrife213
Member since 2006 • 430 Posts

@tormentos said:

@CloudStrife213 said:

How is it speculation when it came out of the own mouth of Jack Tretton? Yes, MS was outspoken on its policies, especially because they announced it at E3, but Sony kept quiet and under the radar, as evidenced by interviews and patents. Unless you believe that Jack Tretton is lying in those interviews, then I can't see any other point of view. They let MS take the fall for it first before totally outlawing DRM.

"There's gonna be free-to-play, there's gonna be every potential business model on there, and again, that's up to their relationship with the consumer, what do they think is going to put them in the best fit. We're not going to dictate that, we're gonna give them a platform to publish on. The DRM decision is going to have to be answered by the third parties, it's not something we're going to control, or dictate, or mandate, or implement."

Owned by the same crap you posted sony say it was up to developers,and look at the tone he use before like well if the developer is up to them to face problem with costumers.

That first bold part clear as water,and the second part confirms it no DRM from sony..ahahahaa

Owned by your own link...hahaha

It's so funny that you can't understand what he said. Reading Comprehension anybody?

As I have been saying, they didn't dictate whether games would use DRM or not. They left it up to publishers. They did not have any policy regarding DRM. They would allow publishers to implement DRM. And we all know what most publishers want. How is allowing DRM any different or good?

A quote that applies to this situation; "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

You on the other hand have admitted that Sony would allow DRM on their console, allowing third-party publishers to implement DRM. Sony would allow an unethical act on their console.

You are the one who got owned.